Here's a serious problem

Question

When there are key injuries(meaning starters) in a game, games tend to go over the total, especially the first game. An example would be tonight's Denver/Toronto game and the list goes on. I'm not kidding. It doesn't seem to matter where the public is in this situation either. Why is that? For all we know 75% of the public could be on the over but the other 25% dropped a sh*tload of money on the Under. So here's some advice we might all want to help each other remember.

Play Over when there are key injuries in the first game with those key injuries. Then we all make money. I'd say this is true 80-90 percent of the time unless you can prove otherwise.

SuperSlapem · Answer

When there are key injuries(meaning starters) in a game, games tend to go over the total, especially the first game. An example would be tonight's Denver/Toronto game and the list goes on. I'm not kidding. It doesn't seem to matter where the public is in this situation either. Why is that? For all we know 75% of the public could be on the over but the other 25% dropped a sh*tload of money on the Under. So here's some advice we might all want to help each other remember.

Play Over when there are key injuries in the first game with those key injuries. Then we all make money. I'd say this is true 80-90 percent of the time unless you can prove otherwise.

LookKaPyPy · Answer

I say that stat is bullshit unless you can prove it isn&#x27;t.

SuperSlapem · Answer

And I&#39;m not one to scream fixed when I lose but......How is it the possible the books catch a middle on both the total and the spread in the same game.The spread went from Den -2 to Tor -2.The total from 208 to 206 or something like that. This makes me think the refs are still involved in fixing games.

MrBator · Answer

109 &#x2B; 108 = 207Well, I&#x27;ll be darned!  You&#x27;re right!  You are, like, SO on to these freakin&#x27; crooks!!

MrBator · Answer

Just kiddin&#x27; ya.

SuperSlapem · Answer

@LookkapypyIf I went back to every game you&#39;d be amazed. Here&#39;s a few. When Curry went down for GS both times he was injured the first game went Over. When Duncan went down the first game went Over. When CP3 went down the first game went over. When Rondo went down the first game went Over. When Iguadala and Gallinari went down first game went over which was today. Shall I go further? The point is the public likes to throw large amounts of money on Unders when there are key injuries. Then the games are fixed to go Over. All it takes is a whistle happy ref to send you to the free throw line 50 times or a ref who will let you run back and forth without blowing the whistle as often as long as the points keep piling up. Trust me. I&#39;ve been monitoring this situation closely and its kinda fishy.

CaliSurferDude · Answer

There were windows at some Vegas (and offshore) books, that were slow to move this line. Some people made coin.

SuperSlapem · Answer

When Carmelo was out @Mia the first game went Over. Whether its fixed or not the trend holds true for this situation at a high percentage.

Take heed to what I'm saying fellas.

You will burn money playing Unders because of key injuries. The oddsmakers have already adjusted the totals with these injuries in mind plus they have the refs on their side.

LookKaPyPy · Answer

No need, I am keeping my amazement for something truly amazing. As for games going over, there is nothing fishy about that. What you have is a reaction of the market (that part is true) which moves the line down. On the game side, you get an open spot for someone to step up, the team moves the ball better (Rondo, Cp -&gt; Bledsoe), there is worse defense being played from someone who is used to playing 20mins vs 2nd units and now has to go 35 vs 1st...and so on... DWill was out vs Pacers yesterday, that one went under after an OT...when you have a team like Nets that run very slow pace and a ton of bad ISO, doesn&#x27;t matter who is out.

SuperSlapem · Answer

CaliSurferDudeThat is true but at the end of the day all of these games have gone Over. If you got under 208 good for you or whoever. You got lucky.This is a very interesting trend any good capper or cappers who are interested in patterns, this pattern has a long trail.

SuperSlapem · Answer

@LookYou&#39;re talking about 1 BK vs Indi game(two of the lowest scoring teams in the NBA and probably two of the best defenses in the NBA). This is a rare situation. And I didn&#39;t say it happens 100% of the time. I said 80-90%. And I think I&#39;m still right about that so if you&#39;re making an attempt to prove me wrong then do it. It would take you all night just to figure out what I&#39;m saying holds true.

LookKaPyPy · Answer

You are the one selling it...you prove me you are right...and btw you are talking about Nuggets (one of the fastest teams, deep), Spurs (elite passing, 3pts), GSW (3pts, JJack), Clips (Bledsoe), Celts (PP leading)...there is nothing strange about that, these are all good teams.

First game Wes Matthews (and Batum) missed for Blazers ? 92-74 loss to Raptors.
LMA missed one vs Nets, a loss and under @98-85

SuperSlapem · Answer

For every game you come up with I&#39;ll probably find 4. Happened with Duncan twice by the way. And Batum is good but he is not there key player imo. I believe Aldridge is. Seems like you&#39;re not getting the point anyway. All I&#39;m saying is that the first game of games with key injuries go Over at a significantly higher rate than Under.

Riceboi · Answer

Look works for the books

HiHoldem · Answer

i like lakers, rockets (will not play), and both unders&#xD;&#xA;bol

LookKaPyPy · Answer

You are the one not getting the point. I don&#x27;t mind the angle (which I have explained), but I do mind your way of throwing out nonsensical stats not supported by nor based on any kind of known reality.Do the homework and show me statistics for the last 5-10 years. Wouldn&#x27;t that be worth investing your time in, if it&#x27;s that significant difference?

Here's a serious problem

Hot Forum Topics